Monday, December 10, 2007

The M&B heroine fights back

In what might be considered a follow-up to Julie Bindel's recent comments on Mills & Boon romances, on Saturday the Guardian published an article by Tanya Gold. She's digging even deeper into the Mills & Boon archives than Bindel did, and is also making generalisations:

these are not disempowerment fantasies, they are in fact the opposite. [...] They were among the first popular novels to depict women who work - all Mills & Boon women work (unless they are kidnapped). Critics complain the books are materialistic and venerate the aristocracy. In fact the Mills & Boon heroine is ordinary, often orphaned (parents tend to die in boating accidents) and plain.

Since this is not an accurate description of all Mills & Boon heroines, I begin to suspect that this is the same Tanya Gold who's fascinated by Jane Eyre: 1

This novel is simply the best novel ever written [...]. It's romantic fiction redux and it's there to heal your pain. [...]

Mr Rochester [...], whom Jane first meets when he falls off his horse, "has a dark face with stern features and a heavy brow; his eyes and gathered eyebrows looked ireful and thwarted".

Do you get the idea? Do you recognise this tender brute from Barbara Cartland, Mills and Boon, Neighbours? [...]

In Rochester, Charlotte wrote a hero no real man can ever touch. Jane Eyre should be subtitled Revenge Of The Parson's Daughter because she spoilt real love for us all.

He is the man in every film, book or TV series you ever wanted; the dark darling you can save from himself. Plus Thornfield would be fab to redecorate.

And Jane is so ordinary, "poor, obscure, plain and little", that anyone could get him. He chucks the glamourous beauty Blanche for Jane. He falls, like a god, into our laps.

But to get back to the vintage Mills & Boons, Gold states that

far from being misogynistic, men who are cruel to women are punished horrifically by the Mills & Boon gods. If your lover takes advantage he will be blinded. If he lies to you he will develop amnesia and think he is a child. If he cheats on you he will have his arms blown off by a landmine. Is that really a disempowerment fantasy? Or is that what I really, really want?

And Mills & Boon was multicultural long before it became fashionable. "I am a foreigner, and you English distrust foreigners," said the hero in They Meant to Marry (1934). "Oh, not since the war," replies his heroine. By the 1950s Mills & Boon woman had junked the Englishman altogether - and found time to smash the glass ceiling. In The Hospital in Buwambo (1957), Dr Sylvia Phillips is told "Africa is no place for a woman". She spits back: "We do everything nowadays" - leaving the hero to have his arms blown off (yes, another one).

Again, I suspect the influence of Mr Rochester, who loses his sight in a fire. Gold is quite clearly writing with her tongue stuck firmly in her cheek, no doubt to protect it from the explosions, as she concludes that "Mills & Boon women respect themselves and expect the men who love them to respect them too - if they don't, they'll get their arms blown off," but this is clearly a spirited defence of the novels from someone who enjoys reading romantic fiction. Read separately, Bindel and Gold's articles would be highly misleading; read together, they possibly balance each other out.

1 It seems likely that Tanya Gold writes for both the Guardian and the Daily Mail. Certainly the Tanya Gold who writes for the Guardian has also written about Jane Eyre.

Hmm, should have said "while they're being kidnapped." I've read about heroines who do some work after being kidnapped and while still being held hostage (I read one recently about a doctor heroine working somewhere in South America who performs an operation on her patient after she convinces her paramilitary captors to let her do so, and she gets them to lend her one of their sharpest knives so that she can carry out the surgery. Sadly I've forgotten the title or the author's name, but it was a fairly recent M&B medical). However, even a heroine like that couldn't actually work during her own kidnapping.

No, because romance heroes don't get any work done while they're kidnapped either!

Yes, of course, how could I have forgotten!!

Really, though, can you imagine a non-Romance reader coming across that phrase in the piece -- KIDNAPPED? Like that's so not on the list of anticipated alternatives for women to working. But the Romance reader wouldn't blink twice at such a reference, I guess? Although I did, so who knows.

KIDNAPPED? Like that's so not on the list of anticipated alternatives for women to working. But the Romance reader wouldn't blink twice at such a reference, I guess? Although I did, so who knows.

I assumed she was thinking of plots along the lines of E. M. Hull's The Sheik. I think the more usual term for it in romance is "abducted" rather than "kidnapped". Maybe that's why you were blinking?

Just to check this, I carried out a rigorous, meticulous and utterly scientific search of two of the relevant corpora. In other words, I had a look in the AAR database, and came up with 7 novels with titles containing "abduct" (including one titled How to Abduct a Highland Lord, which just goes to show that heroes can be kidnapped/abducted too) and only one novel with "kidnap": The Prince Kidnaps a Bride by Christina Dodd. Romantic Times has got 8 romance abductions and 7 romance kidnaps.

There are rather a lot more captives. I wonder if that sounds more romantic, because it's like "captivate." You did work on captivity narratives, didn't you?

I think I blinked because the only place that kidnapping would be an excuse for not working would be in a Romance novel, Laura. Like, 'sorry I can't make it in today; I've been abducted by a rogue CIA-agent with nine inches of pure power who thinks I'm responsible for his brother's death.' Or, 'Gee, has Bethany called in this week to explain her absence. Maybe she's been kidnapped. That would make the third time this year, though, so maybe it's only the flu.' LOL

Anyway, where'd you get that horrible picture? That opens up a whole new discussion, doesn't it?

the only place that kidnapping would be an excuse for not working would be in a Romance novel

Surely in other genres characters get kidnapped by aliens, or rogue groups of robots, or terrorists, or the mafia, or pirates or the wicked lord of the manor, or evil mages or groups plotting to overthrow the monarchy? And it does make it tricky for the humans/CIA agents/peasants/knights to work when that sort of thing happens to them.

Which horrible picture? If you mean the book cover, I said I'd got it from here.

Surely in other genres characters get kidnapped by aliens, or rogue groups of robots, or terrorists, or the mafia, or pirates or the wicked lord of the manor, or evil mages or groups plotting to overthrow the monarchy?

Yeah, but Gold wasn't arguing for the liberated profile of other genre heroines -- she was arguing for a liberated profile of M&B heroines. And threw in kidnapping like it was such an obvious impediment to the working woman's path. Which maybe it is in M&B novels?

But that just takes me back to the feeling that Gold inadvertently kind of illustrated Bindel's argument rather than defeating it. Unless Gold was trying to be funny. And I did laugh while I was choking on my swallow of tea (Yorkshire Gold, yum). But I don't think I was laughing in the spirit of feminine empowerment. Although I don't think a Romance novel male having his arms blown off is a particularly savory genre image, either.

I think she was. There are some abducted heroines in M&Bs, but they're not so common that it's a usual reason for a heroine not to work. They're probably slightly more common than heroes who get their arms blown off because I've come across some of the former and none of the latter.

I have an anthology of snippet-articles from Notes & Queries by J.A. Sutherland, part of his series on literary puzzles, that makes a damned good case that Rochester threw Bertha off the roof when he was pretending to "rescue" her from the fire; and Jane had better be VERY careful to stay on his good side...

I have never found either Rochester or Heathcliff appealing (or, for that matter, Rhett Butler). And as for Austen heroes, does anyone think that Mr. Knightley is better off with Emma? (Incidentally, you should try to find a copy of There Are No Ghosts in the Soviet Union by Reginald Hill, containing "Poor Emma," a quite shocking twenty-years-after sequel.)

I have never found either Rochester or Heathcliff appealing (or, for that matter, Rhett Butler).

No, I've never been keen on Rochester or Heathcliff either. I haven't read Gone With the Wind, so can't comment on Rhett.

And as for Pride and Prejudice, on the other thread Anonymous asked "And do you think Darcy and Elizabeth live happily ever after? That marriage seems destined for big storms,I sense."

I have the sneaking suspicion that Elizabeth and Bingley would have been the better combination. Elizabeth's always going to have bossy tendencies, and Bingley would give her scope for that. In a way, I think their relationship would mirror the emotional closeness that Elizabeth has with Jane. And I think that Bingley would enjoy being bossed around (that's suggested by his relationship with Darcy), but would have enough stubbornness/principle on some issues that Elizabeth would never despise him (as she never despises Jane, and in fact, at some level she really admires Jane's goodness).

Elizabeth was necessary to give Darcy a set-down which would make him change, but after that he'd maybe have been a good match for Jane. At least, they wouldn't have the "big storms" that I too suspect Darcy and Elizabeth would have.

My favourite of Austen's heroes is Henry Tilney. I also like Captain Wentworth, but his behaviour towards Louisa isn't good, and he doesn't have Henry's wit.

I think Gold meant the kidnapping to be humor-with-a-grain-of-truth. Her phrasing of the hero's punishment reads like that to me:

"She spits back: 'We do everything nowadays' - leaving the hero to have his arms blown off (yes, another one)"

If I'm reading Gold right, I've felt a similar incredulity. Kidnapping/keeping the heroine trapped in a house/on an island/etc are surprisingly common in genre romance. They're common in thrillers too, but there's some plot-based justification for that. The kidnapping stands out in romance because it's not a plot necessity but a stand-in for setting up a certain kind of "you're in my power, little girl" relationship.

Elizabeth was necessary to give Darcy a set-down which would make him change, but after that he'd maybe have been a good match for Jane.

I suppose it depends on the extent of Darcy's change. I've never pictured him changing so profoundly that he would suit Jane. In fact, if he changed that much I might not believe in a happily-ever-after with either sister.

At least, they wouldn't have the "big storms" that I too suspect Darcy and Elizabeth would have.

Not everyone minds "big storms".

I like Henry Tilney too, but I've always feared he would grow bored with Catherine Moreland. So I suppose I prefer to match rapier wit with rapier wit, and I think P&P is set up that way. I take Mr Bennet's unhappiness in marriage as indicating that Austen felt that way about Elizabeth and Darcy.

Elizabeth... never despises Jane, and in fact, at some level she really admires Jane's goodness

Elizabeth doesn't despise Jane, and she does admire her, but she is impatient with her at times. I wouldn't foresee great happiness for Elizabeth and Bingley, based on some of Elizabeth's scenes alone with Jane, and on Mr Bennet's and Elizabeth's fondly mocking attitude toward Jane and Bingley (Mr Bennet: "You will exceed your income", "Your servants will cheat you", etc). Then there's Elizabeth's slowness to confide in Jane on touchy subjects--no, I don't think Elizabeth is well matched with a Jane/Bingley type.

No, but isn't that part of what we're getting at in these recent discussions?

How we read and interpret and respond to books can be very personal. For a person who can understand rape fantasies, the being kidnapped and forcibly seduced theme may be empowering/enjoyable. For someone else those power dynamics may trigger really nasty memories of something that's happened to them/has happened to someone they know.

And if I'm responding to Austen not as a critic, but in an emotional way, then I'm inclined to interpret the characters and their relationships in ways which reflect my own preferences.